{"id":2122615,"date":"2026-09-16T15:57:45","date_gmt":"2026-09-16T13:57:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/"},"modified":"2026-09-16T15:57:45","modified_gmt":"2026-09-16T13:57:45","slug":"british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/","title":{"rendered":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal"},"content":{"rendered":"

The recorded-delivery letter is the moment every British employee in France dreads. You open it, you read the word licenciement<\/em> \u2014 dismissal \u2014 and your first reflex is to think in English law: unfair dismissal, two years’ service, Acas, a tribunal in London. None of that applies. In France, dismissal follows French rules from the first day of a permanent contract, whatever passport you hold and wherever you were hired. There is no qualifying period to earn basic protection: the employer must invite you to a formal meeting, listen to your explanations, notify the decision by recorded-delivery letter stating precise reasons, and prove a genuine and serious cause. Your nationality, your accent and your Withdrawal Agreement residence permit change nothing about those duties. If you hold a Withdrawal Agreement residence permit, your right to live and work in France comes from the Withdrawal Agreement itself, not from your employer, and losing your job does not cancel it; the British government’s Living in France guide<\/a> remains the starting point for the residence side while this article handles the employment side.<\/p>\n

French dismissal law is mechanical, and that is good news for an employee who has just been dismissed. Each step the employer skips, each deadline it misses and each vague sentence in the letter becomes a weapon in your challenge before the labour court, the conseil de prud’hommes<\/em>, the elected court that hears employment disputes. This article explains, first, the procedure your employer had to follow and the genuine, serious reason the letter must contain, and secondly, the money you are owed \u2014 notice, statutory severance, unused holiday \u2014 and how to challenge an unfair dismissal before the right court within the one-year limit.<\/p>\n

I. Your dismissal letter has just arrived: the procedure your employer had to follow<\/h2>\n

A. The invitation, the meeting and the letter decide everything that follows<\/h3>\n

Everything starts before any decision is taken, with a formal invitation to a preliminary meeting, the entretien pr\u00e9alable<\/em>. Article L1232-2 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides: “L’employeur qui envisage de licencier un salari\u00e9 le convoque, avant toute d\u00e9cision, \u00e0 un entretien pr\u00e9alable. La convocation est effectu\u00e9e par lettre recommand\u00e9e ou par lettre remise en main propre contre d\u00e9charge. Cette lettre indique l’objet de la convocation. L’entretien pr\u00e9alable ne peut avoir lieu moins de cinq jours ouvrables apr\u00e8s la pr\u00e9sentation de la lettre recommand\u00e9e ou la remise en main propre de la lettre de convocation.” In plain terms, the employer must summon you by recorded-delivery letter or by letter handed to you personally against a signed receipt, the letter must state its purpose, and the meeting cannot take place less than five working days after you receive it. A summons by telephone, by ordinary email or slipped into your pigeonhole without a receipt does not count, and a meeting held on the fourth day breaks the procedure. The official step-by-step description on service-public.fr for dismissal on personal grounds<\/a> follows the same sequence and is worth reading alongside the Code.<\/p>\n

At the meeting itself, the employer must tell you what it is considering and hear your side. Article L1232-3 of the Labour Code<\/a> states: “Au cours de l’entretien pr\u00e9alable, l’employeur indique les motifs de la d\u00e9cision envisag\u00e9e et recueille les explications du salari\u00e9.” You do not attend to receive a decision \u2014 the decision comes later \u2014 but to answer the allegations and put your explanations on the record. You do not have to go alone. Article L1232-4 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides: “Lors de son audition, le salari\u00e9 peut se faire assister par une personne de son choix appartenant au personnel de l’entreprise. Lorsqu’il n’y a pas d’institutions repr\u00e9sentatives du personnel dans l’entreprise, le salari\u00e9 peut se faire assister soit par une personne de son choix appartenant au personnel de l’entreprise, soit par un conseiller du salari\u00e9 choisi sur une liste dress\u00e9e par l’autorit\u00e9 administrative. La lettre de convocation \u00e0 l’entretien pr\u00e9alable adress\u00e9e au salari\u00e9 mentionne la possibilit\u00e9 de recourir \u00e0 un conseiller du salari\u00e9 et pr\u00e9cise l’adresse des services dans lesquels la liste de ces conseillers est tenue \u00e0 sa disposition.” The conseiller du salari\u00e9<\/em>, an outside staff adviser listed by the administration, exists precisely for employees of small firms with no staff representatives: a British employee in a Paris start-up or a Dordogne hotel with five staff can bring one free of charge. If the invitation letter omits that address where it should have given it, the procedure is already flawed. Bring every document that helps \u2014 appraisals, emails showing your results, medical certificates, the contract itself \u2014 and take notes, because what is said at the meeting often resurfaces in court.<\/p>\n

After the meeting, the employer must wait, then notify the dismissal by recorded-delivery letter giving the reasons. Article L1232-6 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides: “Lorsque l’employeur d\u00e9cide de licencier un salari\u00e9, il lui notifie sa d\u00e9cision par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec avis de r\u00e9ception. Cette lettre comporte l’\u00e9nonc\u00e9 du ou des motifs invoqu\u00e9s par l’employeur. Elle ne peut \u00eatre exp\u00e9di\u00e9e moins de deux jours ouvrables apr\u00e8s la date pr\u00e9vue de l’entretien pr\u00e9alable au licenciement auquel le salari\u00e9 a \u00e9t\u00e9 convoqu\u00e9. Un d\u00e9cret en Conseil d’Etat d\u00e9termine les modalit\u00e9s d’application du pr\u00e9sent article. Un arr\u00eat\u00e9 du ministre charg\u00e9 du travail fixe les mod\u00e8les que l’employeur peut utiliser pour proc\u00e9der \u00e0 la notification du licenciement.” Three points matter for a British reader. First, the letter must state the reasons \u2014 a dismissal “for the reasons discussed at the meeting” with no detail is defective. If the reasons are vague, write back promptly asking the employer to spell them out in detail; the employer’s reply then counts as part of the letter. Secondly, the letter cannot be posted less than two full working days after the meeting date, so a letter franked the morning after the meeting is procedurally voidable. Thirdly, the government publishes official letter templates the employer may use, which is why a letter that follows no recognisable structure deserves a careful second look.<\/p>\n

That letter then locks the whole dispute in place, and this is where many employers lose. The Court of Cassation, the Cour de cassation<\/em>, France’s supreme court for employment cases, held on 23 October 2024 in ruling no. 22-22.206, published in the Bulletin<\/a>: “Il r\u00e9sulte de ces textes que la lettre de licenciement fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les griefs articul\u00e9s \u00e0 l’encontre du salari\u00e9 et que le juge a l’obligation d’examiner l’ensemble des griefs invoqu\u00e9s dans la lettre de licenciement.” The dismissal letter sets the boundaries of the dispute, and the judge must examine every complaint stated in it. The facts show why this protects employees: a works supervisor employed since 6 April 1981 was dismissed for serious misconduct on 2 July 2018, asked for details on 5 July, received the employer’s fuller reply on 13 July, and went to the labour court; the Pau appeal court called the dismissal baseless without examining one of the stated complaints, and the supreme court quashed that ruling precisely because every stated complaint had to be examined. For you, the rule cuts both ways in your favour: the employer cannot invent new reasons in court that are not in the letter, and a judge cannot uphold a dismissal on a ground the letter never mentioned. Keep the envelope with its postmark, keep the employer’s follow-up reply stapled to the letter, and compare the two line by line with your adviser.<\/p>\n

B. The reason in the letter must be genuine and serious, from poor results to misconduct<\/h3>\n

The heart of every French dismissal is a short phrase: genuine and serious cause, the cause r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse<\/em>. Article L1232-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> states: “Tout licenciement pour motif personnel est motiv\u00e9 dans les conditions d\u00e9finies par le pr\u00e9sent chapitre. Il est justifi\u00e9 par une cause r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse.” Genuine means the facts must be real, precise and objectively verifiable \u2014 dates, figures, named incidents \u2014 not impressions. Serious means they must be grave enough to make dismissal a proportionate response. A letter that invokes a “loss of confidence”, a “breakdown of the relationship” or “underperformance” without numbers, warnings or examples fails both tests at once. British employees are sometimes dismissed with formulas imported from head office in London \u2014 redundancy-style language, “restructuring”, “role eliminated” \u2014 which belong to economic dismissal with its own heavy procedure and cannot be recycled as personal grounds. If the letter speaks of your post disappearing rather than your conduct, the employer has chosen the wrong legal track, and the dismissal falls.<\/p>\n

Poor performance, the insuffisance professionnelle<\/em>, is the ground most often used against foreign staff and the one most often badly pleaded. It covers inadequate results, repeated errors or an inability to do the job, but never a single mistake punished in anger, and never misconduct dressed up as performance. The employer must show objective evidence assessed over a reasonable period: appraisals, targets that were realistic and communicated in advance, warnings giving you a chance to improve, training offered where a skills gap was identified. A British sales manager dismissed for missing one quarter’s target, with no prior warning and targets set without regard to a realistic sales cycle, has a strong challenge; so does an employee whose “poor English” or “poor French” appears for the first time in the dismissal letter after years of satisfactory appraisals. By contrast, deliberate wrongdoing belongs to disciplinary law, where the letter must describe exactly what you did, when, and why it qualifies as misconduct.<\/p>\n

French law grades misconduct in three steps, and the grade decides what money you keep. Ordinary misconduct, the faute simple<\/em>, justifies dismissal but leaves your notice and severance intact. Serious misconduct, the faute grave<\/em>, is conduct so grave that keeping you even through the notice period is impossible \u2014 theft, violence, a brutal breach of safety rules \u2014 and it strips away both severance and notice pay. That is the direct effect of the two articles examined below: statutory severance is owed “sauf en cas de faute grave”, except for serious misconduct, and notice compensation is likewise lost where serious misconduct is proved. Only wilful misconduct intended to harm the employer, the faute lourde<\/em>, can cost you damages on top of the dismissal; the official scale of consequences for each grade of misconduct on service-public.fr<\/a> sets out the three levels. Because the stakes are so high, employers routinely overstate the grade, labelling a performance issue as serious misconduct to avoid paying notice and severance. The challenge then focuses on the facts: did the employer act within days of learning of them, is there proof beyond assertion, and does the conduct truly make your continued presence impossible? A “serious misconduct” letter posted three months after the alleged events, or built on anonymous hearsay, rarely survives a judge’s reading.<\/p>\n

Some reasons are not merely weak but forbidden, and a dismissal built on them is void, not just unfair. The Labour Code lists the nullities that take the case outside the ordinary compensation scale: violation of a fundamental freedom, moral or sexual harassment, discrimination, dismissal following an equal-pay court action or the reporting of crimes and offences, dismissal of a protected staff representative because of the mandate, and breaches of maternity and similar protections. In those cases the judge must award at least six months’ wages, as Part II explains. For a British employee, the practical triggers to watch are dismissals linked to pregnancy, to a request for a transfer linked to a spouse’s posting, to trade-union activity, to the refusal to accept harassment, or to whistleblowing about accounting or safety practices at the French subsidiary. Your nationality itself can never be a ground: French employment protections apply according to the place of work, and a dismissal that refers, even obliquely, to your British origin, your accent or your residence status invites a discrimination analysis. If any forbidden motive played even a partial role, say so in your first letters and preserve the evidence \u2014 messages, witnesses, the timing between your complaint and the invitation to the meeting \u2014 because nullity pays what the ordinary scale caps.<\/p>\n

II. Your notice pay, your severance and your day before the labour court<\/h2>\n

A. Count your notice, your statutory severance and your unused holiday before signing anything<\/h3>\n

Dismissal does not end the contract on the day of the letter: a notice period, the pr\u00e9avis<\/em>, normally runs first, and its length comes from your collective agreement \u2014 the convention collective<\/em>, the sector-wide rulebook that sets minimum rights for your industry \u2014 or failing that from your contract and local custom. Executives in Paris often have three months, junior staff one or two; check the agreement named on your payslips rather than trusting the letter. If the employer releases you from working the notice, the money is still due. Article L1234-5 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides: “Lorsque le salari\u00e9 n’ex\u00e9cute pas le pr\u00e9avis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, \u00e0 une indemnit\u00e9 compensatrice. L’inex\u00e9cution du pr\u00e9avis, notamment en cas de dispense par l’employeur, n’entra\u00eene aucune diminution des salaires et avantages que le salari\u00e9 aurait per\u00e7us s’il avait accompli son travail jusqu’\u00e0 l’expiration du pr\u00e9avis, indemnit\u00e9 de cong\u00e9s pay\u00e9s comprise. L’indemnit\u00e9 compensatrice de pr\u00e9avis se cumule avec l’indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement et avec l’indemnit\u00e9 pr\u00e9vue \u00e0 l’article L. 1235-2 .” A dispensation that sends you home the same day is therefore paid leave in disguise: salary, benefits and accrued holiday to the last day of the notice, on top of severance. Only proved serious misconduct removes it.<\/p>\n

Statutory severance, the indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement<\/em>, belongs to every employee on a permanent contract dismissed with at least eight months of continuous service. Article L1234-9 of the Labour Code<\/a> states: “Le salari\u00e9 titulaire d’un contrat de travail \u00e0 dur\u00e9e ind\u00e9termin\u00e9e, licenci\u00e9 alors qu’il compte 8 mois d’anciennet\u00e9 ininterrompus au service du m\u00eame employeur, a droit, sauf en cas de faute grave, \u00e0 une indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement. Les modalit\u00e9s de calcul de cette indemnit\u00e9 sont fonction de la r\u00e9mun\u00e9ration brute dont le salari\u00e9 b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiait ant\u00e9rieurement \u00e0 la rupture du contrat de travail. Ce taux et ces modalit\u00e9s sont d\u00e9termin\u00e9s par voie r\u00e9glementaire.” The rates, fixed by regulation, set a legal floor your contract or collective agreement can only improve: Article R1234-2 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides that “L’indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement ne peut \u00eatre inf\u00e9rieure aux montants suivants : 1\u00b0 Un quart de mois de salaire par ann\u00e9e d’anciennet\u00e9 pour les ann\u00e9es jusqu’\u00e0 dix ans ; 2\u00b0 Un tiers de mois de salaire par ann\u00e9e d’anciennet\u00e9 pour les ann\u00e9es \u00e0 partir de dix ans.” Part-years count pro rata: Article R1234-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> adds that “L’indemnit\u00e9 de licenciement pr\u00e9vue \u00e0 l’article L. 1234-9 ne peut \u00eatre inf\u00e9rieure \u00e0 une somme calcul\u00e9e par ann\u00e9e de service dans l’entreprise et tenant compte des mois de service accomplis au-del\u00e0 des ann\u00e9es pleines. En cas d’ann\u00e9e incompl\u00e8te, l’indemnit\u00e9 est calcul\u00e9e proportionnellement au nombre de mois complets.” Take a concrete case: five years of service on a \u00a3-equivalent gross reference salary of 3,000 euros a month gives five quarters of a month, 3,750 euros minimum, before any more generous company agreement. The official severance calculator and rules on service-public.fr<\/a> let you check the employer’s figure. The reference salary itself is the most favourable of your last twelve or three months’ average, including bonuses pro rata, so rebuild it from twelve payslips rather than accepting the figure pre-printed on the balance-of-payments receipt.<\/p>\n

Unused paid holiday is the third sum employers most often underpay. France gives two and a half working days of holiday per month worked, and every day accrued but not taken at the end of the notice must be paid as holiday compensation on top of everything else. Reconstruct the balance from your last two holiday years: carry-over rules, sick-leave accrual and days imposed by the employer in August all change the total. Then come the end-of-contract papers, which the employer must hand over without you having to beg: the work certificate summarising your posts and dates, the employment-centre certificate that opens your rights to unemployment benefit, and the balance-of-all-accounts receipt itemising every sum paid. Register with France Travail, the public employment service, as soon as the notice ends \u2014 late registration delays benefit, and British newcomers sometimes wait for a translated P45-style document that does not exist in France. One warning before you sign the balance-of-all-accounts receipt: signature starts a short statutory clock after which the stated sums can no longer be challenged, so sign “under reserve”, take copies of every payslip and contract amendment first, and have the figures checked within days, not months. The official page on remedies for a void or unfair dismissal on service-public.fr<\/a> summarises what each type of challenge can yield.<\/p>\n

B. Challenge an unfair dismissal before the labour court within one year and claim the right scale<\/h3>\n

The court that hears you is the labour court, and its first mission is settlement. Article L1411-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> provides: “Le conseil de prud’hommes r\u00e8gle par voie de conciliation les diff\u00e9rends qui peuvent s’\u00e9lever \u00e0 l’occasion de tout contrat de travail soumis aux dispositions du pr\u00e9sent code entre les employeurs, ou leurs repr\u00e9sentants, et les salari\u00e9s qu’ils emploient. Il juge les litiges lorsque la conciliation n’a pas abouti.” Conciliation first, judgment if it fails \u2014 and a well-prepared file often settles at that first hearing, because the employer’s lawyer can read a defective procedure as clearly as yours can. You have a free choice of forum: Article R1412-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> states that “L’employeur et le salari\u00e9 portent les diff\u00e9rends et litiges devant le conseil de prud’hommes territorialement comp\u00e9tent. Ce conseil est : 1\u00b0 Soit celui dans le ressort duquel est situ\u00e9 l’\u00e9tablissement o\u00f9 est accompli le travail ; 2\u00b0 Soit, lorsque le travail est accompli \u00e0 domicile ou en dehors de toute entreprise ou \u00e9tablissement, celui dans le ressort duquel est situ\u00e9 le domicile du salari\u00e9. Le salari\u00e9 peut \u00e9galement saisir les conseils de prud’hommes du lieu o\u00f9 l’engagement a \u00e9t\u00e9 contract\u00e9 ou celui du lieu o\u00f9 l’employeur est \u00e9tabli.” Work in Paris and you can bring the case before the Paris labour court even if head office sits in Lyon; hired at a London job fair for the Paris office and that hiring place is available too. For readers in Paris and the \u00cele-de-France, the practical points are the competent court for the place of work, the conciliation hearing a few months after filing, hearings conducted in French \u2014 arrange a sworn interpreter and translated key exhibits rather than hoping your spoken French will carry a legal argument \u2014 and a file built around the invitation letter, the meeting notes, the dismissal letter with its postmark, twelve months of payslips and the end-of-contract papers.<\/p>\n

Speed matters more than in England: you have one year from the notification of the dismissal to challenge the rupture itself. Article L1471-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> states: “Toute action portant sur la rupture du contrat de travail se prescrit par douze mois \u00e0 compter de la notification de la rupture.” Twelve months from the letter, not from the end of the notice and not from the day you find a lawyer. Wage claims run on a longer three-year clock, but the challenge to the dismissal dies at twelve months, so file within the year even if settlement talks are ongoing \u2014 talks do not stop the clock. Before the court, the judge re-examines both the procedure and the substance, and the Code places the burden of doubt on the employer: the judge forms a conviction from the evidence both sides supply, ordering any investigative measures considered useful, and Article L1235-1 of the Labour Code<\/a> ends with the employee’s shield \u2014 “Si un doute subsiste, il profite au salari\u00e9” \u2014 if doubt remains, it benefits the employee. An employer that produces assertions without documents therefore loses the points it cannot prove.<\/p>\n

If the dismissal is held to have no genuine and serious cause, the judge can propose reinstatement with accrued benefits preserved, and where either side refuses, awards compensation within a statutory scale, the bar\u00e8me Macron<\/em> named after the 2017 ordinances that created it. Article L1235-3 of the Labour Code<\/a> states: “Si le licenciement d’un salari\u00e9 survient pour une cause qui n’est pas r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse, le juge peut proposer la r\u00e9int\u00e9gration du salari\u00e9 dans l’entreprise, avec maintien de ses avantages acquis. Si l’une ou l’autre des parties refuse cette r\u00e9int\u00e9gration, le juge octroie au salari\u00e9 une indemnit\u00e9 \u00e0 la charge de l’employeur, dont le montant est compris entre les montants minimaux et maximaux fix\u00e9s dans le tableau ci-dessous.” The table runs by full years of service: no minimum and one month maximum below one year, then a rising scale \u2014 three months minimum from two years, up to twenty months maximum beyond thirty years \u2014 with lower minimums in firms with fewer than eleven employees. Five years’ service thus yields between three and six months’ gross salary, ten years between three and ten. British claimants often ask whether this scale survives European review. On 9 April 2025 the Court of Cassation answered in ruling no. 24-13.958<\/a>, holding that the scale provisions “permettent raisonnablement l’indemnisation de la perte injustifi\u00e9e de l’emploi et assurent le caract\u00e8re dissuasif des sommes mises \u00e0 la charge de l’employeur, sont de nature \u00e0 permettre le versement d’une indemnit\u00e9 ad\u00e9quate ou une r\u00e9paration consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme appropri\u00e9e au sens de l’article 10 de la Convention n\u00b0 158 de l’Organisation internationale du travail (OIT)”, and concluding: “Il en r\u00e9sulte que les dispositions de l’article L. 1235-3 du code du travail sont compatibles avec les stipulations de l’article 10 de la Convention pr\u00e9cit\u00e9e.” The same ruling adds that the European Social Charter’s Article 24 has no direct effect in litigation between private parties, so the Charter cannot be used to set the scale aside. Plead within the scale, document the harm \u2014 length of unemployment, age, family charges, the procedural faults \u2014 to pull the award towards the maximum, and reserve nullity arguments, where at least six months’ wages apply with no ceiling, for cases carrying a forbidden motive.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/h2>\n

A French dismissal is a checklist, and the employer’s checklist is your checklist in reverse. The invitation by recorded delivery five working days before the meeting, the meeting where reasons are stated and your explanations collected, the assistance of a colleague or an outside staff adviser, the dismissal letter by recorded delivery at least two working days later stating precise reasons \u2014 each missing line is a procedural fault the labour court sanctions. The letter then freezes the dispute: only its stated complaints count, and only a genuine, serious, proven cause saves the dismissal, with doubt benefiting you. Money follows the same order: notice worked or paid, statutory severance from eight months’ service at a quarter-month then a third-month per year, unused holiday on top, and the end-of-contract papers that open unemployment benefit. Challenge the rupture within twelve months before the labour court of the place of work, aim inside the compensation scale documented to its maximum, and plead nullity with its six-month floor wherever a forbidden motive appears. The British employee who files the envelope, counts the days and rebuilds the reference salary from twelve payslips arrives at conciliation with the stronger file \u2014 and most defective dismissals settle there.<\/p>\n

Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n

Telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm. We can review your dismissal letter, your notice and severance figures and your deadline for the labour court with you. Call Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen at +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a>. Contact the firm<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dismissed in France after Brexit? A British employee’s guide to the dismissal procedure, notice and severance pay, and challenging an unfair dismissal before the labour court.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16318,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80312,80314],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2122615","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nDismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Dismissed in France after Brexit? A British employee's guide to the dismissal procedure, notice and severance pay, and challenging an unfair dismissal before the labour court.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kohen\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kohen\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Kohen\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd\"},\"headline\":\"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4082,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp\",\"articleSection\":[\"British Desk\",\"D\u00e9cryptage\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"citation\":\"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal\",\"about\":[{\"@type\":\"Thing\",\"name\":\"British Desk\"},{\"@type\":\"Thing\",\"name\":\"D\u00e9cryptage\"}],\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00\",\"speakable\":{\"@type\":\"SpeakableSpecification\",\"cssSelector\":[\".article-content > p:first-of-type\"]}},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/\",\"name\":\"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp\",\"width\":6528,\"height\":4027},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, attorney specialized in real estate and business law in Paris, advises and assists companies and individuals in their real estate, commercial and contractual transactions. He also handles real estate litigation and the resolution of complex commercial disputes.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd\",\"name\":\"Kohen\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Kohen\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/author\\\/kohenmlk\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal","og_description":"Dismissed in France after Brexit? A British employee's guide to the dismissal procedure, notice and severance pay, and challenging an unfair dismissal before the labour court.","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","article_published_time":"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00","author":"Kohen","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kohen","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/"},"author":{"name":"Kohen","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd"},"headline":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal","datePublished":"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/"},"wordCount":4082,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp","articleSection":["British Desk","D\u00e9cryptage"],"inLanguage":"en-US","citation":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal","about":[{"@type":"Thing","name":"British Desk"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"D\u00e9cryptage"}],"dateModified":"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00","speakable":{"@type":"SpeakableSpecification","cssSelector":[".article-content > p:first-of-type"]}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/","name":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp","datePublished":"2026-09-16T13:57:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/mohamed-nohassi-2UZMc83XJ8I-unsplash.webp","width":6528,"height":4027},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/16\/british-employee-france-dismissed-procedure-pay-challenge-brexit\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dismissed by Your French Employer After Brexit? How a British Employee Tests the Procedure, Collects the Money and Challenges an Unfair Dismissal"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, attorney specialized in real estate and business law in Paris, advises and assists companies and individuals in their real estate, commercial and contractual transactions. He also handles real estate litigation and the resolution of complex commercial disputes.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd","name":"Kohen","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","caption":"Kohen"},"url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/author\/kohenmlk\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2122615","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/251031309"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2122615"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2122615\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16318"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2122615"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2122615"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2122615"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}